Sunday, May 2, 2010

cosmetic surgery and athletic enhancement drugs (the name of the poster escapes me)

I realize that it doesn't exactly take an enormous amount of brain power to see the connection between the two but they both brought about some really good discussion that I'd like to take a stab at sorting through.

I knew cosmetic surgery was not uncommon but the dollar amounts they threw out (12 billion a year was it?) astounded me. I am kind of bothered by the vanity that that number exposes but at the same time I realize that i am by no means above the influence given by society to try to be attractive. The difference between makeup and surgery seems pretty clear cut but procedures like botox blur the line. Maybe botox or even surgery aren't in themselves harmful but in my opinion the over-obsession with appearance is.

Athletic enhancement drugs have very similar issues. Its fairly easy to differentiate between vitamin or protein supplements and anabolic steroids, but cretin and countless other drugs and supplements lie in varying degrees between the two.

I was especially fascinated by two opposite comments that were made pertaining to what should be allowed in sports. One person proposed that the only clear line that can be drawn is right at the start, saying that all supplements should be banned. The other stated that anything should be allowed. In my opinion both of these have serious problems associated with them.

How strict can you really set the standard if you want to exclude everything. Is protein not allowed? What if it is needed for health purposes? If vitamins are banned are vitamin enriched genetically modified foods banned too? But the other side of the spectrum has its own share of difficulties. If steroids are allowed in pro sports are they allowed in college? High school? Little league? It is known that long term use of steroids is harmful to the body but if "everyone is doing it" do aspiring athletes really have a choice?

This struggle is paralleled in cosmetic surgery. Though most peoples jobs don't rely directly on appearance, it certainly plays a role in how people are perceived which is hugely important when giving a business proposition or interviewing for a job or almost anything.

I think I agree with Robin when he says that each new technology brings its own share of troubles (or something along those lines). We can now be stronger and more "beautiful" than ever but at what cost? Not even to mention the whole new set of standards and regulations that will be brought about if/when machines and computer chips are able to enhance the human body far past it's natural limitations.

1 comment:

  1. Interesting tie-in of genetically modified foods--to what extent do we know or control what is going into our bodies anyhow? Can we be punished for taking in things we didn't know about? (or I guess, how effective can playing dumb be...) And yes, as Jim says, there is no telling what is truly "natural." ....

    There is a woman I know who chooses not to vaccinate her children, because she does believe that she'd rather, if her child is to be harmed or die, have them harmed by something that just "naturally" happened to them, than by something she chose to introduce into their bodies (vaccines, which she thinks are potentially harmful).

    These choices all gamble with our bodies and our livelihoods. . .

    ReplyDelete